In its most recent landmark decision on gerrymandering (Rucho v. Common Cause), the Supreme Court abdicated to the legislature, stating that the courts could not make decisions on gerrymandering.

What was the Supreme Court's decision on gerrymandering in the case of Rucho v. Common Cause?

1) The Supreme Court ruled in favor of gerrymandering.
2) The Supreme Court ruled against gerrymandering.
3) The Supreme Court did not make a decision on gerrymandering.
4) The Supreme Court referred the case to the lower courts.

The correct option is 1) The Supreme Court ruled in favor of gerrymandering. The Supreme Court in 'Rucho v. Common Cause' declared that partisan gerrymandering was a political issue beyond the reach of federal courts. This effectively did not result in a decision on the practice of gerrymandering itself but on the court's role in such matters.

In the case of Rucho v. Common Cause (2019), the Supreme Court's decision on gerrymandering was that the issue of partisan gerrymandering is not within the jurisdiction of federal courts.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the conservative majority that partisan gerrymandering presents "political questions beyond the reach of federal courts." However, Justice Elena Kagan's dissenting opinion highlighted the negative impact of gerrymandering on democracy, stating it "debased and dishonored our democracy."

Ultimately, the decision has left the regulation of gerrymandering to the state legislatures, making the correct answer to the student's question option 3: The Supreme Court did not make a decision on gerrymandering, in the sense that it did not rule on the merit of the practice but rather on the judiciary's inability to address it. Therefore, the correct option is 1) The Supreme Court ruled in favor of gerrymandering.